Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="vulcan_idic" data-source="post: 1688128" data-attributes="member: 19615">I've been thinking a lot about so called &quot;powergaming&quot; lately and having a philosophical dissonance with regards to it.&nbsp; On the one hand it can disrupt the game and decrease the pleasure quotient of those not participating in the power grab.&nbsp; On the other part it is a natural outgrowth of the laws of nature...&nbsp; in the natural world the law is &quot;Survival of the Fittest&quot; and many parts of human psychology are still centered around this and it's corrolary, the flight-or-fight reponse.&nbsp; These may be the psychological equivalents of vestigial organs, but they are no less a part of us for that.&nbsp; &nbsp; As Bill Gates &amp; Co. has demonstrated in the business world, one can still apply these instincts in the modern world, though applying them to rather different arenas than the natural world - i.e. business, or even role playing games.&nbsp; Like Bill Gates or a successful breed of animal, the typical powergamer knows the rules of the game, and implements them to his or her best advantage, resorting to lawers (Bill Gates), rules-lawyering(Gamers), or physical combat(animals) when their interpretation of the rules are called into question.&nbsp; &nbsp; So how does this aspect of human psychology affect our games?&nbsp; Does the &quot;greed&quot; of the natural human instinct to further ones self necesarily paint one as an &quot;evil&quot; character?&nbsp; Does supression of this instinct and striving for altruism (though some might argue whether or not altruism truly exists) define a &quot;good&quot; character?&nbsp; At what extent of a character strengthening itself&nbsp; as much as possible become &quot;powergaming&quot;?&nbsp; Are not successful Olympic atheletes a real world example of &quot;min-maxing&quot;?&nbsp; &nbsp; So at what extent is such behaviour at the gaming table inevitable,and how much should it be curbed?&nbsp; If it were completely curbed then you would have a &quot;completely equal&quot; system probably akin to something like one segment I recall from Ursula Leguin's Lathe of Heaven, or We by Yevgeny Zamyatin, or 1984 by George Orwell.&nbsp; On the other hand, if left unchecked then your game devolves into a feral, dark ages type power competition.&nbsp; What is the proper balance?&nbsp; Does powergaming and it's like have it's place in the world of role playing games or is it merely a burden on the game?&nbsp;&nbsp; I look forward to hearing the thoughts of those who might care to ruminate on this subject.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="vulcan_idic, post: 1688128, member: 19615"] I've been thinking a lot about so called "powergaming" lately and having a philosophical dissonance with regards to it. On the one hand it can disrupt the game and decrease the pleasure quotient of those not participating in the power grab. On the other part it is a natural outgrowth of the laws of nature... in the natural world the law is "Survival of the Fittest" and many parts of human psychology are still centered around this and it's corrolary, the flight-or-fight reponse. These may be the psychological equivalents of vestigial organs, but they are no less a part of us for that. As Bill Gates & Co. has demonstrated in the business world, one can still apply these instincts in the modern world, though applying them to rather different arenas than the natural world - i.e. business, or even role playing games. Like Bill Gates or a successful breed of animal, the typical powergamer knows the rules of the game, and implements them to his or her best advantage, resorting to lawers (Bill Gates), rules-lawyering(Gamers), or physical combat(animals) when their interpretation of the rules are called into question. So how does this aspect of human psychology affect our games? Does the "greed" of the natural human instinct to further ones self necesarily paint one as an "evil" character? Does supression of this instinct and striving for altruism (though some might argue whether or not altruism truly exists) define a "good" character? At what extent of a character strengthening itself as much as possible become "powergaming"? Are not successful Olympic atheletes a real world example of "min-maxing"? So at what extent is such behaviour at the gaming table inevitable,and how much should it be curbed? If it were completely curbed then you would have a "completely equal" system probably akin to something like one segment I recall from Ursula Leguin's Lathe of Heaven, or We by Yevgeny Zamyatin, or 1984 by George Orwell. On the other hand, if left unchecked then your game devolves into a feral, dark ages type power competition. What is the proper balance? Does powergaming and it's like have it's place in the world of role playing games or is it merely a burden on the game? I look forward to hearing the thoughts of those who might care to ruminate on this subject. [/QUOTE]

Verification